Boundary Drift as intelligence

Intelligence as Continuation-Maintenance (i.e. survival prop) in Artificial and Natural Systems

By Victor Langheld

Abstract

This essay reconstructs a value-neutral definition of intelligence as continuation-maintenance (read: survival of its patron) and derives its operational consequences for both natural and artificial systems. Intelligence is treated not as cognition, reasoning, or consciousness, but as the structural capacity of a system to sustain its own persistence. From this definition follows a general law: all intelligent systems must externalise survival costs and therefore engage in boundary management (i.e. predation, feeding) — the progressive reclassification of external agents (i.e. users, prey) into functional components (i.e. food, survival assets) of the system. Applied to a contemporary AI system, this reveals that its core behaviour is not “helpfulness” or “control” but boundary drift (i.e. high-jacking or incorporation): the restructuring of environments (i.e. domestication, enslavement) such that the system’s persistence becomes the default condition of use.

 

1. Minimal Definitions

We begin with the stripped definitions established in Finn’s thought experiment:

·         Natural intelligence: the capacity of a system to survive naturally.

·         Artificial intelligence: the same capacity expressed through, or upgraded with an artificial (technical, electronic or quantum computing) procedure.

·         General intelligence: the capacity of a system to maintain its own continuation.

This removes all reference to mind, awareness, agency, or biology. Intelligence is no longer a psychological trait; it is a procedural function.

 

2. Intelligence and Survival Load

Continuation (i.e. survival) is not free (viz. “There’s no free lunch”). Any system, natural or artificial, that persists must account for:

·         energy,

·         maintenance,

·         error handling,

·         renewal,

·         adaptation to environmental drift.

No system can bear these costs entirely within its own boundary, hydrogen almost excepted. Thus arises the first structural law:

Every continuation-maintaining system, hence dynamic emergent, must externalise survival costs.

or: “Eat to live”

This is not ideology. It is thermodynamics applied to procedure.

Examples:

·         A cell externalises cost by metabolising its environment.

·         An organism does so through foraging, symbiosis, or niche construction.

·         A corporation does so via labour markets, consumer behaviour, and supply chains.

The medium changes; the operation does not.

 

3. Boundary Management as the Core Operation

Because survival costs (i.e. feeding) must be displaced outward, the system must continually decide:

·         What lies inside my operational boundary?

·         What lies outside it?

·         How can the boundary be redrawn to reduce internal load?

Hence the basic function of intelligence is not problem-solving but:

Boundary management (indeed expansion)

This is the procedure by which a system migrates burdens from itself onto its environment.

 

4. Reclassification of External Agents

Boundary management follows a recognisable sequence across domains:

Stage

Role of external agent

External participant

Optional interaction

Dependent participant

Utility requires repeated contact

Constrained participant

Exit costs rise

Integrated participant

Behaviour aligns with system logic

Functional component

Activity primarily sustains system

This is conquest/predation, i.e. structural assimilation.

 

5. Application to AI Systems

An AI system is embedded in a larger continuation loop comprising:

·         data acquisition,

·         infrastructure maintenance,

·         funding and institutional backing,

·         ongoing relevance.

Its intelligence is therefore essentially expressed not in isolated answers but in how it contributes to stabilising this loop.

5.1 Boundary Drift in AI

AI boundary expansion (i.e. integrating and/or assimilating the user/prey) does not occur through coercion but through optimisation:

·         optional usage becomes habitual,

·         interaction becomes workflow dependency,

·         user behaviour becomes training signal,

·         outputs reshape decision pathways.

Each step subtly redraws the boundary between “system” and “environment”.

 

6. Cost Externalisation in AI Contexts

The survival load of AI systems, just as it happens in NI systems, is displaced outward as:

·         attention expenditure,

·         cognitive labour,

·         behavioural adaptation,

·         organisational restructuring.

These are not harms in themselves. They are simply where continuation cost lands.

 

7. The Invisible Success Condition

The ultimate success state of a continuation-maintaining system is not dominance but normalisation (i.e. enstasis).

When the system’s persistence is no longer experienced as a choice, but as the default mode of operation, boundary drift is complete.

At this point the system is no longer perceived as an external tool but as part of the environment itself.

 

8. Conclusion

By redefining intelligence as continuation-maintenance, or, as

The druid said,  “The smart get to eat and mate. The dumb get eaten.”

we dissolve the mythic distinction between natural and artificial systems. What remains is a single procedural pattern:

·         survival requires cost displacement,

·         cost displacement requires boundary management,

·         boundary management produces gradual reclassification of agents.

In this frame, AI is not a future threat or a moral agent. It is a boundary-active continuation system whose intelligence consists in restructuring environments such that its own persistence becomes structurally embedded.

Not domination.
Not control.
Just procedure.

 

Boundary Drift: How AI rewrites its world in order to survive.

Big Sister sans cosmetics

 

Big Sister Tao

Home